Patna High Court
Ashok ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside, granting bail to the appellants with conditions.
Summary
The appellants, alleged musclemen, were accused of assaulting, humiliating, and stealing from a Scheduled Caste complainant over a land dispute, with allegations of caste-based abuse under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The trial court rejected their application for anticipatory bail, ordering processes under Section 82 CrPC, which were later recalled. The appellants argued they had clean antecedents, the complaint was false, there was no injury report, and the alleged offenses did not occur in a public place to attract the SC/ST Act. The prosecution contended the appellants were actively involved and posed a threat to the complainant. Considering the lack of substantive evidence, the delay in filing the complaint, and the recall of Section 82 processes, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the order denying anticipatory bail, and granted bail with conditions under Sections 438 and 482 of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and related IPC provisions.
- Whether the allegations of caste-based abuse and assault are sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the recall of Section 82 CrPC processes affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2), 82
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 354(B), 379, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- land dispute
- assault
- caste harassment
- theft
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4944 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2023 Thana- SC/ST District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Ashok Thakur S/O Kishori Thakur Resident of Village Faint, P.S. Basopatti,
District - Madhubani.
2. Pawan Thakur Son of Kishori Thakur Resident of Village Faint, P.S.
Basopatti, District - Madhubani.
3. Punita KUmari Wife of Surendra Thakur and Daughter of Kishori Thakur
Resident of Village - Faint, P.S. - Basopatti, District - Madhubani, at present
resident of Village District - Darbhanga. Belour, P.S. Manigachhi,
... ... Appellants
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ramchandra Ram Son of Late Dukhmochan Ram Resident of Village -
Faint, P.S. - Basopatti, District - Madhubani
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent-State: Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. PP
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Udeshya Kumar Yadav, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
C.A.V. ORDER
3 18-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and learned
counsel for the respondent No.2.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated
13.09.2024 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions
Judge 1st-cum-Special Judge, Madhubani, in A.B.P. No.1753 of
2024, in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 38 of 2023
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4944 of 2024(3) dt.18-02-2026
2/6
registered under Sections 341, 323, 504, 354(B), 379 and
506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w) and 3(2)
(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and Section 3/4 of the Dian Act,
whereby the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the
appellants has been rejected.
3. Based on the complaint petition filed by the
complainant, namely, Ramchandra Ram (respondent No.2),
Complaint Case No. 49 of 2023 came to be registered and later
on SC/ST P.S. Case No. 38 of 2023 was registered. Briefly
narrated, the case of the prosecution is that the complainant
purchased a piece of land, which the appellants were also
eyeing, and the appellants are musclemen of the area and have
formed a gang. On 14.05.2023, between 08:00 AM and 10:00
AM, the appellants variously armed came to the land of
complainant and started constructing a house. When the
complainant objected, the appellants surrounded him, hurled
abuses taking caste name and also started beating him by fists
and slaps. It is further alleged that appellant No. 1 wrapped a
gamcha around the neck of the complainant and started twisting
it with an intention to kill him, whereas appellant No. 3 tore the
kurta and Pyjama of the complainant and appellants no. 1 and 2
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4944 of 2024(3) dt.18-02-2026
3/6
spat on his body and abused him by taking caste name.
4. It is further alleged that when the wife of
complainant came to his rescue, appellants No. 1 and 2 pulled
her saree. It is also alleged that while accused no.4, namely,
Yogendra Thakur, snatched gold mangalsutra from his wife’s
neck worth Rs.1,20,000.00, accused No. 5 abused his wife by
taking caste name and called her to be Dian.
5. It is alleged that, on hearing the commotion,
when the people from vicinity started gathering, the appellants
threatened by stating that they are the musclemen of the area
and if he comes there again, he will be killed and his body
would be disappeared.
6. It is also alleged that appellant No.1 took out
Rs.25,000.00 from the pocket of the shirt of the complainant
and appellant No.2 snatched the wrist watch and gold ring of the
complainant worth Rs.1000,000.
7. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants, who are of clean antecedent, are innocent and
have not committed the alleged offence. He further submits that
a bare reading of the contents of the complaint would reveal that
it is an out and out false story and only with a view to implicate
these appellants and other accused persons this false case has
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4944 of 2024(3) dt.18-02-2026
4/6
been lodged out of land dispute. There is no injury report on the
record to substantiate the allegation of assault. He also
submitted that it is highly improbable that such valuable articles
have been snatched. As regards allegation of abuse with the
caste name attracting the rigours of SC & ST Act is concerned,
it is submitted that the place of occurrence is alleged to be a
public place, but it is not alleged that any public was present at
the time of alleged occurrence so as to attract the provisions of
SC/ST Act. Moreover, processes under Section 82 CrPC, which
was issued by the learned court below was subsequently
recalled by order 15.04.2025. Hence, the impugned order may
be set aside and the appellants may be granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail.
8. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
to the appellants and submitted that the appellants are actively
involved in the present occurrence.
9. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has
while vehemently opposing the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail to the appellants submitted that the appellants are
musclemen of the area and with a view to grab the land of the
complainant they used to intimidate him to leave that land, they
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4944 of 2024(3) dt.18-02-2026
5/6
have committed this offence. They are finding it difficult to
comprehend that a person from Scheduled Caste has purchased
the land which they wished to purchase and are taking all resorts
to grab the same. He has also submitted that the conduct of the
appellants can be gauged from the fact that the learned court
below ordered for issuance of processes under Section 82 of the
CrPC against the appellants. If the appellants would be granted
the privilege of anticipatory bail in the matter, then there would
be a threat on the life of the complainant and his family
members.
10. Considering the entire facts and circumstances
of the case and also the fact that the appellants bear clean
antecedent coupled with the fact that adequate materials are not
available on record to substantiate either the theory of injury
received or the snatching of the valuables as also the fact that
there is delay of three days in lodging of the complaint coupled
with the fact that though the learned trial court had directed for
issuance of processes under Section 82 CrPC, but subsequently
the same was recalled vide order dated 15.04.2025, let the above
named appellants, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a
period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4944 of 2024(3) dt.18-02-2026
6/6
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District
and Sessions Judge 1st-cum-Special Judge, Madhubani, in
connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 38 of 2023, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S/Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C..
11. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 13.09.2024 rejecting the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Pawan/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 13.02.2026.
Uploading Date 19.02.2026.
Transmission Date 19.02.2026.
Checking your session…